In Vermont, it is legal to carry a firearm openly or concealed without a permit. That law is one of several state statutes that make Vermont one of the most permissive states in the U.S. with respect to firearms.

Advocates on both sides of gun control issues are gearing up for a showdown in Montpelier next session, as some groups plan to propose tightening gun laws and gun rights groups prepare to stake their ground.

Gun rights groups and anti-domestic violence advocates this session, not without much back-and-forth, compromised on a provision to encourage safe storage of guns removed from alleged domestic abusers.

Nearly half of voters polled own firearms, the survey found. Results found 47 percent of voters own guns while 50 do not. Households earning between $81,000 and $100,000 were most likely to own firearms, the poll found. Sixty-one percent of those households said they own firearms.

In Chittenden County and southern Vermont, most voters do not own firearms, whereas more than half own them in northern and central Vermont, the poll found.

Opinions about guns also split down party lines, poll results show.

Sixty-six percent of Republicans own guns, while 69 percent of Democrats do not, according to poll results.

Slightly more than half of Republicans do not want to change the concealed carry law whereas 80 percent of Democrats do.

More women, 66 percent, said they want to change the concealed carry law. Of male voters, 46 percent said they support a change.

Methodology used by Castleton Polling Institute

This report is based on data from 682 interviews drawn from a random sample of registered voters in Vermont. Interviews were conducted by phone by from March 31 to April 7, 2014. Thirteen percent of interviews were conducted with registered voters on cellphones.

For a sample of this size, the margin of error at the 95 percent confidence level is +/-4 percent, although the margin of error is larger for questions involving subsamples of respondents. Although sampling error is only one source of potential survey error, precautions have been taken to minimize other sources of error for this poll.

The data reported are weighted based on estimations of the population of Vermont registered voters to account for differential in response rates among age groups.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage a civil discourse among readers who are willing to stand behind their identities and their comments. VTDigger has created a safe zone for readers who wish to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation.

Privacy policy

VTDigger.org does not share specific information about our readers with other entities. Email addresses we collect through our subscription list and comment submissions are kept private.

We use Google analytics to generate aggregated data regarding the size and geographic distribution of our readership. This information helps us gauge how many readers come to the website and what towns they live in. It does not include addresses or other identifying characteristics about our readers.

1000

Comment Policy

VTDigger.org requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Be succinct and to the point. If your comment is over 500 words, consider sending a commentary instead.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage a civil discourse among readers who are willing to stand behind their identities and their comments. VTDigger has created a safe zone for readers who wish to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation.

Privacy policy

VTDigger.org does not share specific information about our readers with other entities. Email addresses we collect through our subscription list and comment submissions are kept private.

We use Google analytics to generate aggregated data regarding the size and geographic distribution of our readership. This information helps us gauge how many readers come to the website and what towns they live in. It does not include addresses or other identifying characteristics about our readers.

Sort by: newest | oldest | most voted

Paul Lorenzini

2 years 7 months ago

Just carry your gun openly. Be a gunslinger. It is not against the law to carry, only to carry in a sneaky way. That sounds fair to me. Be wary of the man with a permit, for he is permitted to be sneaky.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Jason Knapp

2 years 7 months ago

It’s actually NOT against the law in vt to carry concealed. I’m curious to know the reason behind you thinking it is sneaky to want to carry concealed…it says nothing in the constitution about how you have to carry your arms.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Paul Lorenzini

2 years 7 months ago

I thought you needed a permit to carry concealed. Good to know, thank you! I am all for the constitution! I am totally against it being rewritten.

I knew they wouldn’t stop in Burlington. Gun registration always leads to confiscation. There is one thing about this issue that forces me to think, “people have forgotten about why they are free”. Now, I’m not talking just about guns here. I am talking about all our Constitutional Rights. Hopefully there will never come a day when we have to get a permit that would allows us to speak freely. Getting a permit is having to ask the Governments permission to carry a firearm. It states in the 2nd amendment, “the rights of the people to bear arms shall not… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Wayne Curley

2 years 7 months ago

If you’re going to use the 2nd Amendment as a prop, try quoting it correctly: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Folks like to conveniently leave out the first part to help bolster their argument. The Supreme Court has consistently made the wrong interpretations on the 2nd – my opinion. Perhaps Ray can be more specific when he talks about, ” These “baby step” laws are the intended approach to finally get us to confiscation, which history will show,… Read more »

Wayne, your opinion and a buck might get a cup of coffee somewhere. From DC vs Heller: The Supreme Court held:[44] (1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53. (a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22. (b)… Read more »

Desperately seeking Heller … Let’s take a quick look at the District of Columbia et al v. Heller case upon which so many nowadays seem to be hanging their “any gun, any time, any where” approach. Before I do, however, I want to point you to the two dissenting decisions in this 5-4 US Supreme Court decision for reasons I will state below. Justice Steven’s dissent (joined by Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer) can be found at http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/07-290P.ZD, and Justice Breyer’s dissent (joined by Souter, Ginsberg and Stevens) can be found at http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/07-290P.ZD1. You will definitely want to return to those… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Robert Ries

2 years 7 months ago

SC dissents do not equate to legal limitations.

The militia clause is not a limiting condition or a prerequisite, in grammar, law or history. if you think it is, cite to the evidence that supports your opinion.

Vermont 1777: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State—and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.”

It explicitly includes the right for personal defense, and not just that of the State.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Kyle Kubs

2 years 7 months ago

Wayne, The second part of the sentence, being a quanifier for the first, which part of “the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” do you think is being misinterpreted? There aren’t a hell of a lot of words there, it doesn’t seem vague to me at all. If you had any knowledge at all of the constitution and had ever read the writings of Washington, Jefferson, Adams, or the others who drafted the document and what their arguments were for making the second amendment to it, you would have to be delusional to… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

John McClaughry

2 years 7 months ago

I have studied Second Amendment history for years, and there is nothing more clear than that the Framers, taking note of the gun control episodes in British history, universally believed that freemen must be armed – in Vermont, ” for the defence of themselves and the state” (Ch I Art 16 1777). A well regulated militia is composed of the armed freemen 18-55; it would be hard to imagine a militia without the (free male) citizen’s right to keep and bear arms.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

John Grady

2 years 7 months ago

Some outfit claimed they took a poll and claim the results are something or other. There is no over sight so the results mean nothing.

Probably 99% of people hang up on people calling and people can and do lie. I lied it to somebody taking a poll.

The first question the pollster should ask is: “Are you aware of the details of VT gun laws?” If a person has no previous familiarity with our laws — they are learning new information AND putting forth an opinion at the same time. The writer describes our treatment of firearm issues as “permissive” — but it is worth mentioning — and perhaps counter-intuitive to many — that VT has the lowest firearm murder rate in the US — 0.3 per 100k pop. This number is obviously corrected for population — but NOT gun ownership — which as you can see… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Eddie Cutler

2 years 7 months ago

Your right Edward. The question is misleading. I once went around my place of work and asked this kind of question. Most people did not even know you could carry concealed without a permit. This leads me to believe that the people who do not know this looked at the question and said yes to go forward and allow people to carry.

Poll and spin and skew all you want, requiring permits to carry a concealed weapon in Vermont was ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL. But, of course, you didn’t tell your respondents that.

“The result is that Ordinance No. 10, so far as it relates to the carrying of a pistol, is inconsistent with and repugnant to the Constitution and the laws of the state, and it is therefore to that extent, void. ”

ATTENTION VERMONT LEGISLATORS. As we prepare for the next session in Montpelier, I point you to noncompliance levels with gun laws in NY and CT. The new gun laws are being defied on a massive scale. I caution you against moving for new gun laws that we WILL NOT OBEY. I have already pledged my best effort to defeat one area legislator on this issue alone. Others will do likewise. Do NOT move against our rights. We will vote you out.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Eddie Cutler

2 years 7 months ago

Eddie Garcia you can count on the 3800+ members of the Gun Owners of Vermont who will be voting against legislators who vote for any gun control.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

John McClaughry

2 years 7 months ago

As I recall, the Rosenthal case was about a permit to carry, whether or not concealed.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Ed Fisher

2 years 7 months ago

Vermont polls ? ,Now that’s interesting ! Hey I know , lets pull a” Chicago !” Lock up all the guns , make them illegal , …..if you want ! Now watch the crime rate rise like Chicago , like NYC , LA. , I have no interest in the liberal media’s opinion of concealed or non-concealed carry . What interests me though, In the NEK , we can be a half hour from a 9-1-1 police presence ,so we have to be able to protect our own homes , One problem that bugs me is , recurring domestic violators… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Ed Fisher

2 years 7 months ago

And another thing ; I don’t understand how anyone can still believe the accuracy of “polls “, so many of them are born of an pre- judged ,agenda !

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Kristin Sohlstrom

2 years 7 months ago

Polls are only sometimes helpful. Mostly they are useless. As long as you realize that reality, you’ll see that you are being played like a fiddle and your emotions are being used to change existing law in VT – again. 682 people do NOT speak for all of any population in any situation. Were YOU polled? I wasn’t. When the NRA came out the other day supporting the right for permit carriers to have their permits cross state lines but didn’t address what to do with states who do not require a permit to carry, my initial gut reaction was… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

sandra bettis

2 years 7 months ago

yup. let’s arm our children too – next thing you know, they’ll all be carrying guns to school. “yippee, we’re all gonna die!”

Sandra, when I was a kid in school, it was not that unusual for boys who hunted to bring their hunting rifles to school, on the buss, leave them in the principals office for the day and to be dropped before their regular stop so they could walk through the woods and hunt on their way home.

I notice we had no mass shootings or the like when this was going on, interesting…

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Paul Lorenzini

2 years 7 months ago

Back when the government trusted it’s citizens, and when the citizens trusted the government.

Sandra – you just insulted half the people in the State of Vermont with your remark – you watch to much Main Stream Media – think about not having your 1st amendment rights then you will understand how 2nd amendment defenders feel about “ALL” those Constitutional Rights. This is not just about guns!

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Neil Gerdes

2 years 7 months ago

yet here you are, reading the “Main Stream Media” and commenting on it. Go back to your tea party.

If your political party does not believe in Rights, you’re doing it wrong.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Robert Ries

2 years 7 months ago

Who’s paranoid here? We’re not the one who think everyone with a gun wants to murder us….

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Bob Pierre

2 years 7 months ago

Laura,

Did it ever dawn on you to find out and report the “Why” VT does not require a permit?

Journalism 101

There is no “law” about it because of a SCOVT ruling from the early 1900’s. It is based on the VT Constitution, not a (or lack of) legislative action.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Kristin Sohlstrom

2 years 7 months ago

I will also add that by making absolute statements like this is not accurate because the reality is it’s a percentage of the people polled, not all Republicans and not all Democrats. “Sixty-six percent of Republicans own guns, while 69 percent of Democrats do not, according to poll results.” Also, percentages tell people nothing. I would like to know how many individual people in each region were polled. Is this poll talking about 50 individual people in Southern Vermont and 400 in Chittenden County? Why is Castleton comparing regions to a county? That’s comparing apples to oranges. How were the… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Carl Fyrdman

2 years 7 months ago

1) The first question may draw false negatives, in that some people may not want to admit (to someone they don’t know) that they own a firearm. 2) The second question should be rephrased as: “Would you support a law that allows the police and politicians to be the ones who decide whether a law abiding citizen can have a concealed handgun?” In fact, imagine the revised second question ended with “..for the defense of themselves and their loved ones?” The phrasing is crucial and will affect responses. I think that IF Castleton really wants a fair poll, they ought… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Paul Lorenzini

2 years 7 months ago

Well, almost anything that comes from a VT college, related to politics, will have the liberal utopian agenda behind it. ALMOST ANYTHING. There are some constitutional kids in school, but they are drowned out by the Al Gore disciples.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Dave Van Deusen

2 years 7 months ago

As a Vermonter, as a Town Constable, and as a person who is a Progressive, I am 100% against curtailing our traditional gun rights. This right is protected by the Vermont Constitution. Also there is no objective reason to change our gun laws. As a society, Vermont has, on average, less than ten murders a year, with some of these not even committed with a gun. So why would one seek to fix something that is not broken? I would assert there is only one reason… Misguided allegiance to ideology: “gun control” as part of the liberal mantra we hear… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Chris Weinheimer

2 years 7 months ago

Vermont, along with Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming are the only “constitutional carry” states where citizens are not required to have permits to carry concealed weapons. However, Vermont is unique in that there is no permit, concealed or otherwise, available to Vermonters. Under Vermont law anyone from any other state or jurisdiction can carry a concealed weapon in the State of Vermont. Most states make concealed carry permits available, on a “shall issue” basis to residents of the state. Some states issue “concealed carry” permits to non-residents. Concealed carry permits issued by a state are given reciprocity by many other states… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Robert Ries

2 years 7 months ago

And yet, in Vermont, people who own and carry without a permit are still NOT a problem. Why add a layer of bureaucracy on top of something that already works just fine? The problem is that other states need to follow Vermont’s lead, or be sued for denial of Constitutional Rights.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Chris Weinheimer

2 years 7 months ago

Quite right. Vermont has arguably the best record in the nation when it comes to gun violence. HR 822 the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 failed to make it out of the last session of Congress. However, the NRA continues to support the passage of this type legislation which would require states to recognize the concealed carry permits of all other states. Without a concealed carry permit special provisions would have to be made in Federal law to accommodate the lack of availability of Vermont issued concealed carry permits for Vermonters. While it would be good if all other… Read more »

Ok, nice conversation going here. I would just like to add, the gun-o-phobes (and I say this about those organized and fighting to take our guns) are people from out of State, as I mentioned above. I don’t think many of our Legislators have a problem with the way our gun laws are now. My Representative, Cindy Weed, a Progressive, loves to shoot and target practice. This action has been brought to us in a box from States South of us, their ideology, their money, there special interest group but it is our State Sovereignty they are coming after, another… Read more »

I would only add one more comment here. In the photo at the top we see what is known to shooters and Sportsmen as a “hand cannon”, a 45 caliber magnum. This is not a gun that a normal law abiding citizen would chose to “conceal carry”. This is from vtDigger, the “unbiased” journalist.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Robert Ries

2 years 7 months ago

Ummm… not quite. It’s a .460 S&W Magnum, usually used as a hunting hand-gun. It’s definitely a bit more powerful than ‘needed’ for self-defense, but could be highly effective in some circumstances.

Fortunately, ‘concealed’ is not a requirement for Constitutional Rights.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Kyle Kubs

2 years 7 months ago

Once again, the anti-gun minions in Vermont are a solution looking for a problem… Coming in to the elections, the RNC & DNC will do anything they can to draw divisions between the people of this state, to set them against each other and keep them distracted from the monopoly the hold over our elections, and non existent gun issues are a great way to divide and conquer. I implore you all, don’t let the spin doctors set you off and put you to work against your neighbors and family. Forget the labels, Republican/Democrat, liberal/conservative/socialist/this & that. Talk to your… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Jason Knapp

2 years 7 months ago

We must stand against this gun control. Please people, get involved! Write your senators and reps!!

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Jim Christiansen

2 years 7 months ago

Poll reporting is a disappointing replacement for journalism. The subjective topics do nothing but reinforce the stereotype of a biased media looking to drive the news rather than report it.

How long should I hold my breath for a VT Digger / Castleton poll on Vermonters opinions on restrictions to third trimester abortions?

Care to drive that news Digger?

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Pete Novick

2 years 7 months ago

I was in Tennessee last month, settling my father-in-law’s estate. One day, I went to Walmart to pick up a few items to get his house ready for sale. It was a little after ten in the morning. I got what I came for and headed for an express checkout line and found one with only one other customer. As I placed my four items on the belt, I saw the customer in front of me, a white male in his 50’s, was carrying a semi-automatic pistol in a quick draw holster on his right hip. I tried not to… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Robert Ries

2 years 7 months ago

1. What is a “quick draw holster”? I’ve no idea what you are talking about… and I suspect you don’t either. 2. “This is not the America I want to live in. ” Really? You do not like freedom and liberty? Than I suggest you create a new America elsewhere. There are many places to choose from already….. And as you later pointed out, it’s not actually a real problem. So why the initial hyperbole? 3. “My statistics professor back in the day might have put it this way. What is the probability of someone discharging a firearm in Walmart… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Chris Weinheimer

2 years 7 months ago

Many people find that an openly carried handgun is disturbing when carried by someone in civilian clothing. This fact alone argues for the concealed carry of firearms. I wonder, how many concealed firearms go unnoticed? How many concealed fire arms have been accidentally discharged in public places lately? Had there been any they would have made memorable news headlines in Vermont. As to the man in Tennessee we can be reasonably assured that he had a permit issued by the State of Tennessee. To acquire that permit in Tennessee he had to demonstrate the following: • Applicants shall not have… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Jason Knapp

2 years 7 months ago

Actually there was a negligent discharge of a fire arm in public and it was done by a Williston police officer,yet not on by the public they serve. Imagine that mr Tennessee…

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

sandra bettis

2 years 7 months ago

vermont has the most lax gun laws in the nation. anyone can buy a gun and that is why criminals from out of state come here. i would hope to see the legislature stand up to the nra the way that they stood up to vga/monsanto. the gun lovers in this state like to try to intimidate the gun safety people with their ‘big weapons’.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Linda Wysocki

2 years 7 months ago

VT gun shops have to follow the laws of the states where non-residents live, so your statement that anyone can buy a gun is false. I’m also surprised nobody is talking about the costs associated with concealed carry licensing. In CT its over $250 for a permit.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

sandra bettis

2 years 7 months ago

anyone can buy a gun in vt. there are no restrictions on private sales and no registration laws in the state of vt.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Paul Lorenzini

2 years 7 months ago

DO YOU ACTUALLY THINK THAT CRIMINALS WILL REGISTER THEIR GUNS SANDRA? that sure would be a deterrent to people with evil intentions. lol!

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

sandra bettis

2 years 7 months ago

i love the walmart analogy. it is pretty much the same as mine – a gun in the first act goes off in the third – proven way too many times to count.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Kyle Kubs

2 years 7 months ago

Sandra, You remind me of a child sitting in a room full of PhD’s talking Quantum Physics. You have no understanding of the subject at all, but still feel the need to weigh in. You obviously have nothing useful to contribute. Having people that know nothing about guns making decisions about who should be allowed to have what and how they should be allowed to use them, is like taking a group of people that have never even seen an automobile up close, much less driven one, making up the rules of who should be licensed and how & what… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

sandra betttis

2 years 7 months ago

a room full of phd’s?? rotf!!! i would say that it is the people who won’t budge in the interests of safety who are the ones with nothing to contribute. and, no, i don’t watch mainstream tv and, no, i’m not from out of state. talk about assuming…..

sandra – when I am in my own home, I would never budge in the name of safety. Nor outside my home if some thug was meaning to do harm to innocent people. You may not watch MSM but your narrative comes right off their script.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Pat McGarry

2 years 7 months ago

If we’re going to fix things that aren’t broken in Vermont, in addition to requiring concealed weapon permits, we should adopt the following Massachusetts laws: A police permit required for rifles and shot guns. A police permit required for pepper spray. No beer and wine sales except in inner city liquor stores. A requirement that only uniformed police officers may direct traffic at construction sites. No longer allow a Vermont doctor’s judgement to be sufficient to issue a disabled parking placard. Require Vermont DMV to hire 40 full time medical doctors and take an average of 8 weeks to review… Read more »

To those who carry a Bible in one pocket and a handgun in the other, I have to ask: If guns were around in Roman times, would Jesus have carried one to protect himself and followers against big government intrusions on his right to free speech and on the right of the people to keep and bear arms ?

Oh yes it does. Jesus preached peace and love. Unfortunately, many of His so-called believers are working hard to strengthen the gun lobby, a lobby which spends millions to keep tighter gun laws off the books using, along with intimidation, an antiquated interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Jesus would cry for the innocents gunned down at Columbine, Aurora, Fort Hood, the US Navy base near DC, and New Town, and for the negligence of our governments in trying to prevent such slaughter.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Ed Fisher

2 years 7 months ago

It is extremely disappointing to see the amounts of misinformation thrown out here , A few Facts ; 1- No ,not anyone can purchase a gun ,legally ! 2- I have watched gun dealers actually deny a sale just because they have a gut feeling ! 3-Every gun sale in Vermont gun stores and gun shows , waits for a federal background check on the phone- before your purchase ! 4- The media is the problem and not the solution to these constitutional issues! 5- And so is the individual state and city governments!

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Patrick Cashman

2 years 7 months ago

Did the Castleton Polling Institute conduct a poll on any other Constitutional Rights? Such as: “Would you support a change in legislation that forbids speech offensive to the listener, or do you believe in maintaining the concept of freedom of speech as it is currently interpreted?” Or perhaps “Would you support a change in legislation mandating the quartering of security personnel by homeowners during national emergencies, or do you support maintaining the proscription against forcible quartering of soldiers as it is currently enacted?” More importantly, if they had, should a public opinion poll of the majority have any bearing on… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Robert Ries

2 years 7 months ago

I’d like to see Permits, Licenses and Fees required for all of our Constitutional Rights. Just to keep everything consistent. What could go wrong with that?

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Bill Olenick

2 years 7 months ago

VT= lowest gun deaths in the nation=guns unregulated outside of federal background check=if its not broken don’t fix it… period=do not let the press hype you all up.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Andrew Fischer

2 years 7 months ago

A few comments: 1. More people have died from guns in the United States since 1975 than U.S. soldiers died in all of World War II. 2. We have a higher death rate *per capita* from guns than the next 22 nations in our economic group, *combined*. You don’t think there’s a problem? Perhaps you should research what happened in Britain and Australia when they put sensible gun laws into place after gun massacres in those countries and solved their problem overnight. I have some insights for all of the NRA members on this list: 1. The NRA cares about… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Amy Corrigan

2 years 7 months ago

Interestingly, the next 22 nations in our economic group also protect their borders.

In Los Angeles, over 90% of the outstanding warrants for homicides are for illegal aliens. About 11,000 of the 17,000 outstanding fugitive felony warrants are for illegal aliens.

80,000 to 100,000 illegal aliens who have been convicted of serious crimes are walking the streets.

Good luck with the ‘Our rights are being violated so we’re going to take away your rights’ argument.

So, this argument is going to continue. It will go the way of the bogus polls being conducted. There will be fear mongering by MSM. People have already been scared by the constant drum beat of “guns are bad”. There has been no change to our Vermont Constitution or the US Constitution. Yet, our Governments are violating these rights, under the vail of fearful constituents. Our Government is BREAKING the law thru the use of Democracy and fear, fear fabricated and directed toward Law Abiding citizens. When our Reps took their oath of office they swore to “protect and defend”… Read more »

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Bob Moyer

2 years 7 months ago

Solution: get rid of the second amendment and end all this argument over common-sense, safety legislation. It is ridiculous to have stronger protections against dangers from automobiles and household appliances than from firearms.

0

|

0

ReplyHide Replies ∧

Paul Lorenzini

2 years 6 months ago

BOB MOYER= RIDICULOUS. GET RID OF DOCTORS AND MEDICINE BECAUSE THEY HURT SOME PEOPLE!